was illiterate. but he ended up going to yale and becoming a brain surgeon. he and his wife have one the carson's scholar's fund giving mill experience for people to go to college. >> chris: why do you think the speech struck such a nerve? >> the average american wants a nation of for of and by the people and not for of and by the government. >> as for the critics? >> they weren't listening. they want to criticize anything they don't agree with. >> chris: he doesn't think he good president because he is too blunt, he says, he isn't freeway afraid of any charge. >> do you have any qualms in the fact you were lecturing the president of the united states while he just had to sit there? >> you know, i serve god and my

purpose is to please him. if that before you, who can be against you. >> chris: you may want to keep him on the political radar. he retiring this june, so he is going to need something to do. now this program note. next sunday we'll have the first interview with mitt and ann romney since the election. we'll ask him about the campaign and how they dealt the defeat and what governor romney thinks of president obama's second term agenda. it's an exclusive interview. that is it for today. have a great week. we'll see you next fox news sunday. this week on the editorial report. president obama turns up the heat on republicans warning of

deish consequences if those march 1st spending cuts kick in. john born says the sequester wasn't his idea but should he try to stop it. plus new york city's murder rate hit a 50 year low but the policy is still under fire. to stop and frisk be soon a thing of the past? and the return of the hollywood black list. campaign against zero dark 30. >> paul: welcome, i'm paul gigot. with days to go president obama turned up the heat on republicans this week saying they would be to blame if across the board spending cuts take affect march 1st. appearing on police officers and firefighters and other first responders, he claimed the consequences of such cuts would

be dire. >> people will lose their jobs. it will jeopardize our military readiness. it will eviscerate investments and thousands will be laid off. tens of thousands of parents will have to scramble to find child care for their kids. >> paul: but in an op-ed john boehner shot back saying the sequester was the white house's idea in the first place and product of his president obama's failed leadership. joining us is dan henninger. jason riley and washington columnist kim strausel. let's start with the merits and the claims of catastrophe if those spending cuts kick in. the is that correct? >> we don't exactly know. what we do know is that the president has every incentive that it's absolutely going to be most dreadful thing. it's a 2.5% cut to the federal budget.

$85 billion out of $3.8 trillion budget. if you can't find that much to cut then there is a problem. >> paul: is there enough flexibility in the sequester that the agency heads will be able to maneuver and prevent things likes cuts to air traffic control? >> that is what the republicans would like to do. democrats no want the armageddon narrative are opposed. >> paul: why is that? >> they like the narrative. >> paul: any cuts at all that are catastrophic? >> that the cuts are stloofk. they don't want to give the president flexibility. the fax of the matter is we are talking about 35% domestic spending, 7% in defense. >> paul: this isn't a cut in social security or in entitlements. >> this is do-able. and the president is going to president this as the apocalypse

is ridiculous. >> that harry reid that he has rejected a request by the republicans to add more flexibility to the cuts? >> we don't know that in particular. but we do know the white house, they were asked about giving this being flexibility politician and they openly said, we would reject any effort to actually lessen the pain of this sequester. the president is getting himself in into a situation where she warning about all this doom and gloom. republicans are giving him a way out of this and increasingly looking to be rejecting that so they can bring down the hammer. >> paul: and the president is insisting on even weakening the cuts, he is saying, look, i want a tax increase, too. we just had a huge tax increase

that is already hurting consumer spending. why does he want another one? >> because it's part of the strategy that he has been running all along which is to make it virtually impossible for the republicans to do business or sign up for it. he wants this them to be a rejection mode so he can blame them for pushing the government into the sequester. add one more thing, paul. flexibility. another word for flexibility, it's responsibility. i do think the republicans should push the continuing resolution that has the so-called flexibility. the president is in charge of the executive branch. let him take the responsibility for deciding how these cuts should be administered which he has been dodging for three years. >> i think the president is feeling very confident now. it's 20 more points higher than republicans. he beat them on the debt ceiling. i beat them on the fiscal cliff. i can do it again. the polls show the public will

be with me. whether it is well founded confidence, we'll find out but that is what is driving some of this. he feels like he can win this. >> paul: you think it may be overconfidence on the part of the president. this is different and how so? >> it absolutely is. republicans no they got beat on the debt ceiling fight and it's a deliberate strategy to make sure it doesn't happen again. they are ready and willing to let it go into effect because think of it. what are we talking at the moment? we're not talking about republicans lack of unity on taxes. we're talking about spending, size of government. talking about additional spending. this is exactly where the republicans want the debate. >> paul: could they split over defense spending where a lot of members don't want the damage that it could do to the pentagon? >> this is where the president is going to hammer the hardest. what is notable here, even the

republicans who have some qualms about how this going to hit the fence, vast majority understand the necessity of allowing it to go into effect. given that the law is kicking in on march 1st, there isn't any legislative option that is open that republicans would go for to change it. >> paul: and if they give in on tax increase again, they are toast in 2015. >> and new york city saw murders plummet but about the policy that is responsible is coming under attack. should stop and frisk be a thing of the past? hi. hi.

i'm here to pick up some cacti. it should be under stephens. the verizon share everything plan for small business. get a shareable pool of data... got enough joshua trees? ... on up to 25 devices. so you can spend less time... yea, the golden barrels... managing wireless costs and technology and more time driving your business potential. looks like we're going to need to order more agaves... ah! oh! ow! ... and more bandages. that's powerful.

sharble data plus unlimited talk and text. now save $50 on a droid razr maxx hd by motorola. bjorn earns unlimited rewas for his small business take theseags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjors small busiss earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth why settle for less? ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses deserve limited reward here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles

or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ] now where's the snooze button? [ crows ] ♪ (train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities. i independent innocent

people don't like to be stopped but innocent people the don't like to be shot and killed either. and stopped takes hundreds of guns off the streets each year. >> paul: that was mayor bloomberg defending his policy. homicide rate reached a record low in 2012. crime fighting tactic is under fire. naacp president accused ray kelly of fearmongering that stop and frisk has made new york city safer. a federal judge ruled last month that a key part of the city's program is unconstitutional. we're back with dan and jason riley and dorothy rebenowitz joins us. on the facts has this policy reduced crime? >> certainly.

that is what the mayor believes. it's what the police commissioner believes. it's what the statistics show. a low number of hoydzs last year. in early '90s the number was around 2,000. it's saving the lives of people in most vulnerable communities. >> heather mcdonald has looked at this and if we had the same murder rate in the 1990s you are talking about 10,000 or so black men dead. >> paul: let's look at comparative murder rates versus some of the other big cities in america. new york city, per 100,000 citizens has had five murders whereas four times less than philadelphia for example or chicago. dorothy, if jason is right why any objections? >> there two rose for objection. this is shear demagoguery.

let's go to the old saying the cushion is not a suicide pact and basis of the claims that minorities are hurt. look at los angeles police that shot those people that brought a vocal group out, yeah, we don't want to shoot people but the police are corrupt. it's a mirror image of the view. >> paul: 84% of the stop and frisk people who are stopped and frisked are minorities including to 2011 and 88% of those stop and frisked, no summons and no arrest. so the accusation, its kind of racial profiling and number two, it's way over done. you don't need to do it because these people aren't threatening. >> but it doesn't take the deterrence effect it could be having. if people know there are police

presence in the community are likely to be engaged in behavior or carrying items that are illegal. this is based on behavior. that is what ben doesn't want to talk about. they are talking about the relevance of the naacp. they are in the grievance industry and they don't want to ignore the black behavior that is driving these policies. only 13% of the population but 50% of the people committing homicides and 90% of the victims are other black people. >> paul: is it still overdone? >> i think the tradeoff in saved lives is worth it. if you go talk to the people in these communities, mayor bloomberg said innocent people don't like to get shot. most of the people living in these ghettos are law abiding citizens. they don't want these knuckleheads selling drugs.

they appreciate this policing. >> paul: dorothy you know a lot of cops and know they all aren't saints. could this be an excuse to harass people? >> even in that suspicion, if you have a minority neighborhood filled with minorities, you are going to have an overrepresentation of people. >> paul: for stop and frisk. >> there is no logic to any of this. you have to show a pattern of choice of minority. you go into a 98% black or hispanic neighborhood and you stop and frisk people and then there are complaints that they are all black -- that doesn't make any sense. >> paul: in terry versus ohio supreme court case stop and frisk was legal. you police could go outside and check people's clothing but they needed more than a hunch. they need a specific set of facts. >> they need a reasonable

suspicion to do that and in these cases it does exist. can abuse happen? yes, but some of the people they are frisking are carrying guns. these are cops working in violent situations. it's up to the people in police to do the best they can that 95% of the cops are not behaving in an abusive way. it's inevitable in a situation like that at the margin things like this will happen. but if you ask the residents whether they want them to stop doing this, the answer is no. they are saferer neighborhoods as a result. >> paul: thank you. still ahead, on oscar weekend the return of the hollywood black list. we'll take a closer look at the campaign against zero dark 30, next. [ whistle blows ]

hi victor! mom? i know you got to go in a minute but this is a real quick me, that's perfect for two! campbell's chunky beef with country vegetables, poured over rice! [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup. it fills you up right. poured over rice! license and registration please. what's this? uhh, it's my geico insurance id card, sir. it's digital, uh, pretty cool right? maybe. you know why i pulled you over today? because i'm a pig driving a convertible? tail light's out.. fix it. digital insurance id cards. just a click away with the geico mobile app. more "likes." more tweets. so, beginning today, my son brock and his whole team will be our new senior social media strategists.

any questions? since we make radiator valves wouldn't it be better if we just let fedex help us to expand to new markets? hmm gotta admit that's better than a few "likes." i don't have the door code. who's that? he won a contest online to be ceo for the day. how am i supposed to run a business here without an office?! [ male announcer ] fast, reliable deliveries worldwide. fedex.

>> paul: just in time for the academy awards, are we seeing the return of a hollywood black list? zero dark 30 the best reviewed film of 2012 is an oscar long shot over depiction of rough interrogation in the hunt for osama bin laden. ed asnor urged academy voters to snub the show. comparing it to nazi propaganda, a letter by dianne feinstein and john mcclain and claiming that the movie is grossly inaccurate and misleading that torture resulted in information that led to the location of osama bin laden. "wall street journal" editorial

member matt cominski joins us now. is this going to hurt the oscar chances? >> it certainly hurt the award season. sentiment shifted and dates back to christmas release the letters from the senators. it is one of the best reviewed films. it has done well at the box office but it's defined as the torture film. it's been hijacked by the politics of torture and far more so in washington. >> paul: you met with bole and what is his argument. he thinks this is unfair? >> he is frustrated. and remember this is film about an event that took place less than two years ago. you can't speak for a film that tries to do something similar. he a former journalist and broke

news on the film how the c.i.a. piece this had totaling and how frustrating it was. then tries to present it in a non-judgmental way. the film does not say torture or enhanced interrogation but is certainly part of the story. we did interrogate the high value targets and they did provide information that led us to bin laden. >> paul: you are saying it's realistic in depiction, not a moral celebration of it? >> absolutely not. it really spells it out in history in a straight way. >> paul: i can't remember when politicians got into this, politics of film making in such a way. what do you think the senators' intrusion? >> i think it's an outrage and people still remember such a time that was the time of the hollywood black list. >> paul: mccarthy area, communist in hollywood accusations?

>> they did exactly what the senator feinstein and senator mccain did. they summoned the attention of the filmmakers asked them to change the film. they wanted the right propaganda influence. they wanted the right view. there is no difference between this. hollywood has spent the last 60 years putting out films about, a great film community. >> paul: why would they bend to the pressure? >> they have short memories. in hollywood they understand where the wind goes politically. yes, this is the view. we're not for the torture but the hollywood community on the face of this is remarkable. >> paul: they aren't just sending letters so ny pictures they went to investigate the c.i.a. in which it cooperated with the filmmakers. mark bolas had to hire an

attorney in anticipation of the investigation. this is to intimidate the c.i.a.? >> they are talking about having katherine bigelow and testify before congress with what relationship they had with the c.i.a.. >> paul: federal agencies cooperate with hollywood all the time. >> since world war ii. john ford a director won an academy award on a documentary. >> paul: what the motive for the senator? >> the motive is really interesting question. this is reflection of liberal mind set that focuses on nothing but enhanced interrogations which occurred in the context of 9/11, london bombings and madrid train station bombings and al-qaeda that was blowing up civilians.

the purpose of the interrogation was to prevent these future events from happening and which they failed. >> paul: so why are senators against that? >> because they are intent or focusing on one thing, torture to the exclusion of these other issues. a is my opinion they are doing it and senators are grandstanders. >> you are looking at ideology driven. if it's not in their mind it's not about the bombings and terrorists but we want to change your view. this is an outrage. when she said dark times is this. >> paul: is it going to win? >> i doubt it. >> paul: one more break, our hits and misses of the week. bayer aspirin was the first thing the emts gave me. now, i'm on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.

[ woman ] learn from my story. otherworldly things. but there are some things i've never seen before. this ge jet engine can understand 5,000 data samples per second. which is good for business. because planes use less fuel, spend less time on the ground and more time in the air. suddenly, faraway places don't seem so...far away. ♪

>>. >> paul: time for hits and michigan. >> a miss to congressman ed